[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/his/ - History & Humanities

Name
Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.

08/21/20New boards added: /vrpg/, /vmg/, /vst/ and /vm/
05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
[Hide] [Show All]


Starting February 1st, 4chan Passes are increasing in price.

One year: $30, Three years: $60


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: lo2.jpg (116 KB, 620x413)
116 KB
116 KB JPG
Donald Trump just went to church before he heads to be sworn in. Has any British leader done that in recent times? Also, you find Americans are less hostile to God in general and even Islam than Brits are. Brits are extremely suspicious of any kind of religion whether it's Catholicism, Islam, Protestant, orthodox Judaism, etc, meaning that even random British members of the public will attack comments online such as "pray for them" by casually inserting atheism into the discussion and disrupting Christians.

Yet we don't see this with Americans who are happy with their leaders and public figures openly quoting from the Bible. There is much less hostility and pushback towards religion from Americans than there is Brits.
>>
>be America
>be pristine forest and prairie inhabited only by Native American warriors and agriculturists
>get a bunch of poor-ass English and Scottish zealots who got exiled off their home countries
>100 years pass by, the country becomes independent
>now half-starved German Protestant zealots arrive with wacky beliefs about speaking in tongues and living for the sake of working instead of working for the sake of living
>a few decades pass, the country is in shambles after the Civil War
>even more starving people arrive from Germany, Ireland, and Poland, the vast majority of them Papists who would defend paedophile priests even under the threat of prison
>30 years pass by, paedophile-defending Papists from Southern Italy and Jews arrive en masse
>also, weird Chinamen who believe in Taoist magic arrive to work in the rice fields and on railroads
>sooner or later, Mexican paedophiles start to arrive en masse too, bringing along more images of la 12 year old Mary, the Virgin of Cunnylupe
>then shit like the Red Scare and the Civil Rights movement happen back to back, both of which strengthen churches, mostly Protestant ones
>after that, the 1970s Jeezus revival happens, with churches becoming full of stoners-turned-newborn Christians
>the 1980s brings another Christian revival movement, along with the birth of Wall Street-friendly American neoconservatism
>1990s is just crack and hoes, but when 9/11 takes place, then everyone's all Jeezus and America again
>New Atheism starts cropping up in response to 2000s neocons, but quickly gets shut down by Kekistanis wielding the banner of Christ-chan
>and the rest of it is just /pol/
>>
>>17445251
This wall of greentext must have sounded better on weed than it does reading it sober.
>>
>>17445150
I've come to think that the US separation of church and state might have helped religion in the long run.
In places like the UK or Iran where religion is institutionalized it crumbles.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHzzOAo-R3U
>>
>>17445150
>Donald Trump just went to church before he heads to be sworn in.
i wonder how many years it's been since he last was
>>
>>17445251
>quickly gets shut down by Kekistanis wielding the banner of Christ-chan
Brownoid alert
>>
File: 1544874215155.png (236 KB, 406x229)
236 KB
236 KB PNG
The stupid answer is "America was founded by puritans" but the descendants of those puritans are probably some of the least religious in America now.

The real answer is the rise of televangelism fostering a generation of evangelicals (which is also why American Christianity is so retarded and grifty compared to Christianity outside America)

>>17445267
This is probably thanks to things Roe v Wade and Engel v. Vitale and other sweeping judicial activism of the Warren court that was often explicitly against religion that created a heavily motivated political class within the religious space and the Republicans being willing to exploit it.
>>
>>17445290
Yes, it seems to be the case that competition is actually good for religious observance, which it makes sense, you need an enemy to rally against, Just look at Christians in Spain fighting against Muslims during the Middle Ages, or Catholics and Protestants fighting in Ireland, or Muslims and Hindus fighting in India. When your religion is the established dogma of the land with no challengers, you really have to go out of your way to remain pious on your own and not stagnate and eventually fall off.
>>
>>17445150
>Donald Trump just went to church before he heads to be sworn in. Has any British leader done that in recent times?
The King is literally the head of the Anglican Church. What are you talking about?
>>
>>17446111
Call me when the Prime Minister goes to church.
>>
>>17446149
>moving the goalpost
>>
>>17446253
The "king" is at best a mascot, the prime minister is the actual leader.
>>
>people that fled state sponsored religion are more religious
hmm
>>
>>17445150
>Has any British leader done that in recent times?
The King(or Queen when that happens) of England is the head of the Church of England.
>>
File: 1ppf75.jpg (45 KB, 500x432)
45 KB
45 KB JPG
>>17446253
>goalposts
BROWNOID SPOTTED
>>
>>17446279
No, at any time the King can retake control of the entire United Kingdom. Royal Prerogative. Depending on how the commomweath has their constitutions set up, it's potentially possible for him retake control of them as well.
The fact that the King doesn't, isn't actually relevant to if it's possible or not.
If the parliament was just openly fucking everything up on purpose, there'd probably be no civilian pushback to it either.
>>
File: 1672480118664167.gif (1.63 MB, 360x270)
1.63 MB
1.63 MB GIF
>>17446526
>No, at any time the King can retake control of the entire United Kingdom.
>>
>>17446573
>The fact that the King doesn't, isn't actually relevant to if it's possible or not.
"The fact that the King doesn't, isn't actually relevant to if it's possible or not."
It's still allowed, by law, the King just doesn't.
>>
>>17446598
It is relevant because if he actually tried he would be promptly ignored and probably get a speedrun of formally abolishing the monarchy started.
>>
>>17446612
>ignore everything I say
>invent some other hypothetical
Are we done this farce yet?



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.